| Components - Details | |
|---|---|
| NHTSA Complaint Number: 005038148 | Incident Date: Sep, 08 2005 |
| Consumer's City: NEW WINDSOR | Consumer's State: NY |
| Vehicle Transmission Type: AUTO | Manufacturers Name: General Motors, LLC |
| Model Name: YUKON | Model Year: 2000 |
| Vehicle Involved in a Crash: No | Component's Description: Service brakes, hydraulic |
| Vehicle Involved in a Fire: No | Persons Injured: 0 |
| Vehicle's VIN#: 1GKEK13T4YJ | Date added to File: May, 23 2021 |
| Date Complaint Received: Sep, 10 2005 | Complaint Type: IVOQ |
| Incident Reported To Police: No | Purchase Date: May, 04 2000 |
| Was Original Owner: Yes | Anti-lock Brakes: Yes |
| Number of Cylinders: 8 | Date of Manufacturer: - |
| Was Vehicle Towed: - | Description of the Complaints: Ref present recall on 1999-2002 chevy & gmc silverado, yukon light trucks. i notice that rust is the factor in the anti-lock sensor recall. i would like to further add that rust is also responsible for breakdown in entire braking system. i have a 2000 yukon with 26000 miles that has extreme rust decay to rear axle backing plates and front rotors. the local dealer when questioned admitted its due to rust belt issues. i did notice that gm has admitted to having rust belt issues with its braking system. why are you not requiring them to mitigate the entire system which is effected? are they not part & parcel of the braking system? why should the consumer be saddled with the expensive repair of replacing theses components which if they have not failed seriously impair the braking and handling of the vehicles in question. my mechanic advises that he has had many of the same vehicles come in for repairs with identical rust disintegration. the area of vehicle sale & use in this country should not be used as an excuse by the manufacturer. *nm |
